Architect Archive
Thread: OMU's fixed
Dvnce wrote:
My personal Opionion this is not an acceptable Fix.. 5 is really an insult. It still is a cumbersome limit to a crate. Doesnt really Improve our inventory management at all...
I am not happy at all..
Not that I am under the impression that the devs feel the need to explain anything to thier customers, but any rationale about the number of OMUs in a crate? I don't know if you have been discussing this with them (or if you can tell us), but if you can share, was 10 to a crate not "starwarsy"?
Anyway; I am not enthused by this number, it does reduce the impact these have on our inventory by a factor of 5. Would I be happier if they had left it as it was? Nope. Am I happy now... well, I'm lslightly less unhappy. In another 18 months the devs will look at us again =(
Message Edited by Smart_Darwin on 06-10-200504:00 AM
Message Edited by Smart_Darwin on 06-10-2005 04:00 AM
Dvnce wrote:
My personal Opionion this is not an acceptable Fix.. 5 is really an insult. It still is a cumbersome limit to a crate. Doesnt really Improve our inventory management at all...
I am not happy at all..
Im sorry you are still unhappy, but this will make me and probably most of all the architects happy as well as our customer base as we can now more easily craft harvesters. An 80% reduction in inventory is a pretty good improvement.
So, all of the other "mining components" come 10 per crate (since the beginning of time) and the OMUs came0 per crate since the beginning of time. After almost 24 months someone manages to find the obviously obscure and secret place in the code proper (I assume this value isn't in a table someplace since that would make too much sense) and says "I'll change that number". And picks the number "5" out of the air? Why 5? Why not 42, or 666, or .... ?
I'm not unhappy with the number per se (although this isn't an 80% reduction in storage space by any stretch of the imagination).
I'm unhappy because:
- it took 24 fricking months
- someone picked a number out of the air with zero throught to it
- clearly the number of devs that know anything about the architect profession is a fat zero
I would take a wild guess that they might have picked 5 cause the light ore mining unit is 5. The light ore mining unit might be right next to the ore mining unit in the code too.
Pawlin wrote:
I would take a wild guess that they might have picked 5 cause the light ore mining unit is 5. The light ore mining unit might be right next to the ore mining unit in the code too.
I doubt that is a wild guess. I think you hit the nail on the head.
I was so glad to hear this I almost fainted.
This is just plain great!!!!!
Tolk_Okeefe wrote:
But why under Space Mining??? I mean??? They really dont care, do they?!!!?
No, they don't. And I think that Pawlin is probably right on the money on his guess. Everytime I think about the software architecture of this game I cringe.
Grateful that a company selling me a product actually listens to its customers two years later? I guess I have a different model of what it means to "delight the customer". ![]()